September 8, 2017
“…Reawakening Jessie’s senses and giving her a new lust for life…!” –Indiewire
All photography and photo art on this site taken and created by
Carveth uses this site for image processing, themes (“looking up”, alleys, painted urban, etc.), variations on one (example: top, and below), mistakes, experiments with editing tools, fonts, styles of presentation, personal disclosures as well as evasions, and thoughts on photography criticism. Also,
Jessie Carveth, 2017
…innumerable site revisions, revisions of pages, name changes, and “whatever else I can get in and out of quickly.
I don’t know anything about photo editing. I do it carefully”, she said.
Cameras: iPhone, Sony mirrorless, Canon.
(Note: With the exception of her profession, clearly not photography, Carveth’s knowledge is pretty limited. “I know people’s secrets and how they lie, what they lie about, what they want and why they’re not getting it, and all the ways to be sick or bad instead of feel and talk. I can tell when someone would rather die than do something different or new.”)
JC: “The photo below is a variation of one I snapped last winter from the 17th floor of an office building. It looks good to me, however it’s edited. It owns me, gets too much exposure, pulls me back when I stray, pops up everywhere.”
If you see too much of it, email firstname.lastname@example.org stating how many you’d like removed from the sites:
The camera gets credit for unfiltered photography.
For the most part, we like or dislike unfiltered (or minimally altered) photography based on subject.
For example, there’s no amount of taste, refinement, training, or talent that will lead to an appreciation of Ansel Adams by those who have no interest in mountains.
With no judgment (this is style, not ethics), there seem to be two types of photography: documentation and art (or craft). The former is compelling as long as the subject is. More on this
1. The camera is a machine. It does what it wants.
2. Regarding photography, a machine art, refining through processing in order to choose one of many good edits is unnecessarily restrictive.
“Of all photography activities, the process of transforming an initial capture into series of variations suits me most.” (Note: The Carveths are multiparous, promiscuous, exhibitionist voyeurs.)
“This is the best. I’ll choose this one to show.”
Why? You like variation 13 as much as, or in a different way than your variation 20.
One realization among many, arising from my participation in photo-sharing social media like Instagram, and from studying all photography, past and present, is the practice of discarding versions of photos, picking one to show. The custom of choosing one of many edits, filing away or trashing the rest, is hard to understand.
A theory is that “unfiltered” has significance historically, being a marker of the talented, true photographer. Unfiltered means one. The one capture. This outdated reverence for unfiltered has carried over to image edit art.
Though unfiltered is meaningless in photo art, a process that produces many interesting and beautiful versions/edits.
But the norm, still, is choosing a final version.
The initial capture of the beach house looked like watercolor coming out of the camera, the awnings did. How could she have predicted what the machine would grab? She couldn’t have. The original capture belongs to the camera, it has nothing to do with the photographer. It occurred when a button was pushed, not because someone drew with ink, or painted.
Photo editing is also a machine art, but the result relies on a more complex interplay between the capture and a photo artist, not camera button and photographer .
The artistry of photography comes from an intense (sweaty) relationship between the camera’s capture and the image editing photographer.
Watercolor/Posterized. Stop. Show all.
MORE ON EXPERTS
All photography and photo art Jessie Carveth, 2017